The purpose...
...of this column is to try to take a leftwing lighthearted look at politics, especially in Leeds and Yorkshire. This has become almost impossible over the last few weeks.
The invasion of Iraq by US and British troops and the subsequent death and destruction has led to a very serious crisis. The sending of an extra 120,000 US troops who have not been acclimatised to desert warfare is a measure of how desperate things are. Even the troops there are no match for the Iraqi troops once the fighting gets close. As one of my many American friends pointed out, some of the US troops might come from South Side Los Angeles but they are still used to shopping at the Mall each week and having running toilets. They are now fighting with supply lines running almost the length of France and they have run out of toilet paper. There is great difficulty in obtaining clean water supplies even for drinking. And the desert heat is just beginning to build up.
As the famous Leeds war-gaming strategist Trevor Bavage pointed out, the Americans and British appear to be recreating the mistakes made on the first British invasion of Iraq. That disaster is described in all its gory details in On the Road to Bagdad: A story of the British Expeditionary Force in Mesopotamia by Frederick Brereton published by Blackie & Son in 1917.
The failure to obtain any legal or international backing for the war has completely isolated Blair and Bush. The initial rise in support for the war will fade when people realise that it will not be a pushover, and the "coalition of the willing" includes the Solomon Islands and Iceland.
However, this war has done something which even I feel outraged about. It has succeeded in making Saddam popular. Iraqi citizens are returning to fight against the invaders. I repeat this: Blair and Bush have helped to prop up Saddam's popularity. The result looks like a long drawn-out bloody war with hundreds of thousands of casualties.
The Americans were going to march to Baghdad and take out Saddam. Now they intend to lay siege to the city and starve him out. Of course they are hoping for an internal coup or uprising. However the criminal betrayal of Basra by Bush the Elder means there is no trust in the Americans. Millions of Iraqis now face death by disease and starvation.
It might be messy to withdraw the troops but it is easily the most effective way of saving their lives and the lives of millions of civilians. Would such a strategy leave Saddam in power? Yes, but given his continued isolation and the destruction of his infrastructure he would not last long. The alternative looks like a bloody siege and a martyr's death for Saddam, and the creation of a new generation of terrorists.
Peace and peaceful change are the more viable alternative.
The wider view: the United Nations
More than 20 Arab countries and 115 other nations have demanded an end to the US-led war against Iraq.
They have called on the United Nations Security Council to break its silence and find a way to return to peaceful methods for disarming Saddam Hussein. This reflects the direct appeal made by the Alliance for Green Socialism to all the UN Ambassadors two weeks ago, to not leave the matters to the Security Council.
The UN Secretary General Kofi Annan opened the Security Council meeting by expressing regret that efforts to avert war had failed.
He said the warring parties must now ensure the protection of civilians, those injured in the conflict, and prisoners of war, as well the safe distribution of vital humanitarian aid. "The inability of the council to agree earlier on a collective course of action places an even greater burden on you today. We all want to see this war brought to an end as soon as possible, but while it continues it is essential that everything be done to protect the civilian population, as well as the wounded and the prisoners of war on both sides, and to bring relief to the victims."
The 22-member Arab Group and the Non-Aligned Movement, which represents about 115 mainly developing countries, asked for the meeting to denounce the military action.
The European Parliament
All the British members of the European Parliament, with the exception of the Greens, opposed a fresh declaration on the crisis which referred to alleged breaches of international agreements by America and the UK.
The leader of UK Labour MEPs Gary Titley, who opposes war but does not doubt its legality, said: "We should be moving forward and addressing the humanitarian and reconstruction issues, not making pointless statements on legality."
No one claims a European Parliament vote will influence the situation, but Mr Titley said he campaigned against unacceptable language in the resolution because it "sends the wrong signals." He didn't explain who to but presumably to Bush and his poodle Blair.
The Tories were equally pro-US. Their defence and security spokesman in the European Parliament, Geoffrey Van Orden, warned that condemning the military action at this stage simply deepened EU and transatlantic divisions.
In the end the European Parliament failed to agree on any position on the week-old conflict, rejecting all motions.
The parliament voted down by 255-218 a joint resolution by the Socialists, Greens and Liberals that pointed to widespread public opposition to the war and the absence of UN legitimacy, and deplored the failure to give peace efforts more time.
But it also threw out by 286 votes to 207 a motion by the centre-right European People's Party that blamed Iraqi President Saddam Hussein for the conflict and called for loyal co-operation in a trans-Atlantic partnership with the United States.
America
There have been huge demonstrations against the war across the US with over 1,000 arrests in San Francisco. Much smaller counter-demonstrations have been organised by a radio station network with close links to the Bush regime.
The famous US documentary maker and author Michael Moore used his Oscar win to launch aan impassioned attack on US President George W. Bush and the war in Iraq. "We live in fictitious times," he said when picking up the award for best documentary for his anti-gun film Bowling for Columbine. "We live in a time with fictitious election results that elect fictitious presidents. We live in a time when we have a man sending us to war for fictitious reasons. We are against this war, Mr Bush. Shame on you. Shame on you!"
When he went backstage at Hollywood's Kodak Theatre to face reporters, Moore was unapologetic for his outburst. "I'm an American, and you don't leave your citizenship when you enter the doors of the Kodak Theater. What's great about this country is that you can speak your mind." He said that far from being appalled, many people in the audience stood up to applaud him. "I say tonight I put America in a good light," he said, praising the decision to push ahead with the Oscars despite the war raging in the Middle East. "I showed how vital it is to have free speech in our country and all Americans have the right to stand up for what they believe in," he said.
The newspapers reported he was booed but failed to mention he was also cheered.
Money, oil and weapons of mass destruction
Paul Rockwell, a radical writer in San Francisco, details here the role of the US and others in arming Iraq and Saddam. If any of the moral arguments for war were correct then an accounting of those who armed the dictator in the West would be the first step.
However, the Bush administration is already handing out contacts for the rebuilding of Iraq after the Americans and British have finished destroying it. One of driving forces for Russian and French opposition to the war has been the need to protect their own investment in Iraq, particularly in the oil fields. However these will be taken over by the Americans and the revenue generated used to pay for the war.
The main reason for Blair's visit to Bush's holiday home was to discuss how to overcome their disastrous start to the war. The second was to try to ensure that British companies got a slice of the spoils of victory.
From rec.humor.funny:
Q: "Mr. President, are you positive that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction?"
A: "Yes. We kept the receipts."
Halliburton and Vice President Cheney
The US army said it gave the main Iraqi oil well firefighting contract to a unit of Halliburton Co., a firm once run by Vice President Dick Cheney, without any bidding. Kellogg, Brown and Root, part of Texas-based Halliburton, was handed the contract by the Army Corps of Engineers, which has been placed in charge of fighting the blazes. The contract had not been put out to tender, said the Corps spokesman, Lieutenant Colonel Gene Pawlik.
KBR had already been asked by the Pentagon to draw up plans for extinguishing oil well fires in Iraq, Pawlik noted. "It made the most sense to engage them in the near term as the company to get the mission done because they were familiar with the details of the fires themselves and what would be needed," he said. The value of the contract would depend on the scale of the work.
Shares in KBR parent Halliburton rose 54 cents or 2.68 percent to 20.66 dollars.
Britain and paying for the war
Chancellor Gordon Brown has announced an extra £1.25bn of funding to help pay for the war on Iraq He told the House of Commons that the new amount would take the Ministry of Defence's special reserves for the war to a total of £3bn. He said the money would be drawn by the MoD as necessary for action in Iraq.
"I think the whole House will want to make clear our gratitude to our armed forces, our determination to ensure they are fully supported and will want to send our condolences to the families of the 22 British servicemen who have lost their lives." He also said he was making a further £120m available to the Department for International Development for humanitarian relief in Iraq. Before the war began Mr Brown said the UK would "pay what it takes" to tackle Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. The UK's war allocation is dwarfed by the figures being talked about by the United States whose fighting force is considerably bigger. On Tuesday President Bush sent Congress a request for $74.7bn to pay for the first six months of the war. He also asked for the freedom to spend as much of the money as he wished due to the "fluid" nature of the war. The sum requested by Mr Bush was based on the conflict itself lasting for 30 days. This is also the time scale that is implicit within Brown's announcement. It represents a doubling of the cost of the war to the British taxpayers over the last seven days.
The Prime Minister and the war
Seen on the net. As Fidel Castro said this week, the Internet can "organise the anti-war movement from the cyberspace."
- Our country is faced by an invisible and incomprehensible danger
- We are called upon to attack someone to defend it
- The war will be short, no matter how long it takes
- Victory will be ours, but it will belong to the Iraqi people
- Saddam Hussein's Iraq is evil, but his people are not
- Therefore we will fight him on their beaches .We will fight him in their houses. We will fight him in their hospitals.
- Never before have we dropped bombs so friendly and accurate that they will destroy buildings utterly without injuring those within
- Never before, in the history of mankind, has a nation gone to war with the promise that neither our soldiers nor the enemy will die
- We will compel the Iraqis to be free from the yoke of oppression
- Calling on them to recognise that they have always been able to trust us and to forget that we betrayed them in 1991
- We will feed them, as we have not been able to feed them during the last twelve years
- We will call upon the UN to reconstruct their country
- To summon up the money which we will no longer be able to provide
- The people of Britain do not forget, and therefore I call on them to remember
- Never have so many owed so much to me as Prime Minister.
Hoon and the war
British forces allegedly have found evidence proving Iraq is ready to use weapons of mass destruction against allied forces, claims Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon. He says the issue of protective gear to Iraqi troops in the south of the country has already indicated that Saddam Hussein may be considering the use of chemical or biological weapons.
Now Hoon says fresh evidence uncovered over the past few days has proved it beyond doubt. He didn't produce any evidence
Speaking at an MoD press briefing, he contrasted the Iraqi dictator's readiness to use such weapons with the Coalition's efforts to avoid civilian casualties. However he was unable to prove any evidence of actual use. He threw doubt on Iraqi claims that an American missile had killed 15 in a Baghdad marketplace, suggesting that the deaths may in fact have resulted from Iraqi anti-aircraft fire or one of Saddam's own missiles. Unfortunately within an hour of him reporting his doubts reporters who were actually in Baghdad were saying no anti-aircraft guns had been used for three days.
He finally admitted that the war might take some time. However he obviously doesn't know as he not been allowed to see any intelligence reports on the war. As I have explained in previous Umbrellas he has become a changed man since his visits to the US and always appears to be going down a pre-programmed route.
Here's an interesting article from The Commentary Box, issue 30 29 October 2001, on Hoon's early background. Although written two years ago and tongue-in-cheek it shows just how ingrained Hoon's behaviour patterns are.
Leeds and the war
Again I have had to obtain that far-seeing academic Matthew Caygill's report on Leeds from the Weekly Worker.
"Anti-war events in Leeds have kept up at a high level. Monday saw the biggest meeting of the Leeds Coalition; Wednesday saw more protests by school students. Thursday saw a group of green direct actioners gridlock Leeds's traffic system by chaining themselves together at a vital junction. At lunchtime there were walkouts by council and university workers and students and a lively and exciting (many sit-downs on the way) demonstration of around 1,000 people, many of them school students.
"This was followed by a teatime demonstration of comparable size, which also included sit-down protests.
"This Saturday Leeds held another demonstration - even bigger than the Thursday demos - at the same time as sending coaches both to the protest at Menwith Hill and the national demonstration. This demo also showed the hunger of people to hear arguments, as many more stayed for the speeches, instead of drifting away as soon as possible."
The involvement of school students and those from the colleges and universities shows how when things really move them they are very involved in politics. Unfortunately for Blair they do not support his brand of spin.
One feature of the demonstrations and marches in Leeds has been the very intrusive role of the police video camera. They have taken hours of footage of people demonstrating their democratic rights. In the past you could have counted on the presence of a sympathetic member of the police authority such as Harold Best to be at hand to help out. Today members such Councillor Taggart are just interested in collecting their allowances.
Some light relief
The Liberal Democrats have been distributing a leaflet in Chapel Allerton promoting their candidate in the forthcoming local elections. Their last leaflet issued before Christmas showed their candidate looking at Chapel Allerton from Moortown. Their current one again shows their candidate in Moortown moaning about the lack of consultation over traffic calming schemes. It was a typical Liberal Democrat two-faced approach, refusing to say whether they supported such schemes. However perhaps the candidate will leave Moortown and get to Chapel Allerton before the election.
And of course their leaflet, in common with the New Labour one, fails to mention the war and the crippling effect it will have on local services.
-- Half-Celestial Khan
